Despite heavy external pressure and attempts by local pro-China groups to create problems, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has decided to abolish the National Unification Council (NUC) and the unification guidelines.
When Chen received Republican Representative Robert Simmons of Connecticut, he said the council was "an absurd product of an absurd era" and that it violates the spirit of democracy.
Since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has already modified its stance by saying that Taiwanese independence is one of the public's options, it is only sensible that the council and the guidelines be abolished.
At that meeting, Chen also said that the "1992 consensus" was a lie.
He said that over the past few years, Taiwan's opposition parties, China and the US have again and again demanded the acceptance of the "1992 consensus." Now former Mainland Affairs Council chairman and KMT Legislator Su Chi (
Chen also accused the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party of cheating the world on the matter. When KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou, (
Chen's courage in pushing for the abolition of the council and the guidelines is significant.
The change of power in 2000 was an excellent opportunity for Taiwan to become a normal country.
But the new government only made tiny steps in this direction due to restrictions imposed by the "four noes" and the "1992 consensus."
Binding itself hand and foot to these ideas, the government also adopted the policy of opening up Chinese trade, which resulted in an outflow of capital, technology and skills.
So, on the one hand, Taiwan has been prepared to strike compromises and humiliate itself, and on the other it has opened the door and welcomed the bandits inside.
It is a situation that has proved difficult to undo.
The tragic thing is that Taiwanese know they have been wronged, but are unable to put things right.
Taiwan's promise to abide by the "four noes" was never going to convince China to abandon the threat to invade. Instead, there was a rapid increase in the number of missiles pointed in this direction and the passage of the "Anti-Secession" Law.
Since China does not intend to give up the option of military action, there is no need to stick to any pledge.
Chen's efforts to abolish the council and guidelines does not violate the "four noes" pledge anyway. He is only terminating the operation of a government agency and a doctrine that has not been convened or invoked in six years.
As Chen's proposal only requires an administrative procedure, how is it going to aggravate cross-strait tensions?
The reason cross-strait relations have not improved is because China does not want to renounce force, nor is it willing to treat Taiwan on an equal footing. Taiwan receives no goodwill from across the Strait.
It is China that is attempting to alter the cross-strait status quo and blame Taiwan for escalating cross-strait tensions.
There is now a clear consensus in Taiwan that only Taiwanese may determine the nation's future. The KMT, whose stated goal is unification, has also recently shifted its stance. However, the guidelines see unification as the only option.
Doing away with a government agency and its ossified doctrine of inferiority is not only the best way of asserting our self-belief, but is also a reflection of mainstream opinion.
That is to say, no one has the right to determine Taiwan's future other than Taiwanese themselves.
When Taiwanese and Chinese representatives met in Hong Kong in 1992, the latter insisted on the "one China" principle, while the KMT negotiators demanded that each side be allowed to make its own interpretation of the principle.
No consensus was reached. Beijing's rejection of any consensus has now been verified by Su, who admits to having made the whole thing up. The consensus was therefore a scam orchestrated by the KMT.
The DPP has spent six years looking for new directions for the nation's future. It has now come to its senses, and has chosen to return to the path of Taiwanese consciousness.
It must be stated that Chen has faced tremendous pressure from the US over this development. He certainly needs to resolve tensions with the US and improve communication with Washington.
But abolishing the council and guidelines is the correct move, and having decided to do so Chen must hold firm.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON AND DANIEL CHENG
Two weeks ago, Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) raised hackles in Taiwan by posting to her 2.6 million Instagram followers that she was visiting “Taipei, China.” Yeoh’s post continues a long-standing trend of Chinese propaganda that spreads disinformation about Taiwan’s political status and geography, aimed at deceiving the world into supporting its illegitimate claims to Taiwan, which is not and has never been part of China. Taiwan must respond to this blatant act of cognitive warfare. Failure to respond merely cedes ground to China to continue its efforts to conquer Taiwan in the global consciousness to justify an invasion. Taiwan’s government
This month’s news that Taiwan ranks as Asia’s happiest place according to this year’s World Happiness Report deserves both celebration and reflection. Moving up from 31st to 27th globally and surpassing Singapore as Asia’s happiness leader is gratifying, but the true significance lies deeper than these statistics. As a society at the crossroads of Eastern tradition and Western influence, Taiwan embodies a distinctive approach to happiness worth examining more closely. The report highlights Taiwan’s exceptional habit of sharing meals — 10.1 shared meals out of 14 weekly opportunities, ranking eighth globally. This practice is not merely about food, but represents something more
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
RSS